God destroyed the world with a flood, destroyed all the people in Sodom and Gomorrah, gruesome sacrifices, laws for stoning people, Jericho, requesting the sacrifice of Abraham's son, the sacrifice of God's own son Jesus'. Jesus seems so different to me because instead of making life or taking life he gave his own, he preached forgiveness and grace and seemed to defy the laws made in Leviticus. I'm a christian but I am having a hard time understanding this, especially if one believes the Trinity doctrine.

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise.
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

I think this is different question stressing on the content of OT and NT to compare Jesus of NT and God OT. Here the question is regarding the events and commands we find in Old Testament which at times seems to be relatively different than that which is taught by Jesus in New Testament. A question addressing one of the aspect of this question is here
–
Seek forgivenessFeb 21 '14 at 3:44

A good answer would probably include the relationship of Jesus and God the Father in the Holy Trinity, their roles, and their behaviors in the world.
–
Double UFeb 21 '14 at 4:22

Yes, I didn't say it was a dup, I just said that they're related. The whole, God of the old Testament vs God of the new Testament has been debated for a lot time. I'm sure the google has a lot to say about it.
–
The FreemasonFeb 21 '14 at 4:29

Welcome to the site! This next has nothing to do with the quality of your question, it's just standard to help new visitors avoid misunderstanding the site (as I did at first.) As a new visitor, I'd recommend checking out the following two posts, which are meant to help newcomers "learn the ropes": help page and How we are different than other sites?
–
David♦Feb 21 '14 at 5:33

5 Answers
5

If you look at the role of Jesus especially at the very end of time and the beginning of eternity (eternity for us, that is to say) he does not seem that different after all. When Jesus returns, he will not return as the contemporary hippie Jesus. That image is a product of modern humanistic culture and not the Jesus of scriptures. He will return as the King of kings, terrifying in his righteous wrath. That will be a day of devastation for anybody who does not want anything to do with him.

One striking difference between Noah and the flood vs Abraham and Sodom/Gomorrah is that Abraham was the one who thought that perhaps there was still hope for the two cities. Noah did not. Abraham pleaded with God and God agreed upon a minimum number of righteous people who, if present, would be grounds for not carrying out the punishment. A similar incident happened during the early exodus, when God, appalled at the golden calf the Israelites had made, offered Moses to destroy them all and make him the new god's people. Moses turned the offer down.

It is almost as if God tries to provoke a reaction. If Moses' reaction had been "yes, let's do away with them wrongdoers" God most certainly would have carried out his threat, as his righteousness demands. God never bluffs. At the same time He would have been disappointed in the hard-heartedness of Moses.

I believe this type of thinking can be applied to the mosaic law. It gives a human being an apparent right to stone another, but it does not take away the possibility to show compassion. The problem is that the israelites rarely did that. It tells more about man than it tells about God. The tendency to point fingers at each other and not see our own error is a product of the god-syndrome mankind fell victim of in the garden of Eden. That is something Jesus pointed out, and that is just what he did; he did not introduce a new hippie religion or change, defy, or undo the law, but pointed out how the law should have been applied in the first place. He explained what the law really is and is supposed to be; a dilemma.

I hope this answer helps and manages to touch all the different issues in your question.

If you read through the OT quickly, you will "see the forest for the trees", that is, you will get an overarching picture of who God is and what His purpose for us is. This will often get lost if you focus only on the details of the OT.

Many scholars have discussed the way God interacted with an ancient Near Eastern people, and there are good sources* to read about that. There are some who don't believe in the genocides, the flood, etc.

Even if these narratives are true, the OT teaches us about the Holiness of God, His lovingkindness in the face of our repeated faithlessness, His allowing us free will and to reap the consequences of our sins, and our need for an intercessor - His son. At the appropriate moment in History, He sent us the intercessor, that was foretold in all of the OT. In essence, I don't think we could understand the magnitude of our separation from God to truly appreciate the sacrifice of His son without the OT.

Any attribute of Jesus can be found in the Father. Also, to underscore God's place, the Greatest Commandments are “'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” Jesus does not, ever, contradict any part or action of His father.

*Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament, by Peter Enns

My question was not are they different as much as it was why do they seem different. Because really, they do seem different in many ways but I just needed some solidification on why they are preached to be the same. Also, they ARE different in some ways, Jesus was flesh and blood. Jesus is called the Son of God in the bible and not actually God himself. Also, preaching Judgment is not the same as placing judgement.
–
NiklaasFeb 26 '14 at 20:58

I'm curious about what parts of the NT you've been reading and what sort of preaching you've been hearing. I suspect perhaps an imbalance has taken place. As to why they are preached the same, I would have to point to the many instances where Christ declared Himself to be one and the same, and many other verses besides.
–
The PreacherFeb 27 '14 at 12:25

The word trinity is not in the bible and is merely a word to help explain who Jesus is. Saying that Jesus is God may not be completely accurate. Here are some verses:
–
NiklaasFeb 27 '14 at 12:53

The word trinity is not in the bible and is merely a word to help explain who Jesus is. Saying that Jesus is God may not be completely accurate. Here are some verses: And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone. "I and the Father are one.” John 10:30 He did not say I am God. There are also multiple accounts that Jesus prayed to God and how does that happen if he is God? I think a more accurate statement is to say that there is one God but Jesus is part of God. They are separate in persons but still one in unity and spirit.
–
NiklaasFeb 27 '14 at 12:59

And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation
of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When
He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the
Majesty on high,

John 10:28-30 (NASB)

28 and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish;
and no one will snatch them out of My hand. 29My Father, who has
given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch
them out of the Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”

Both God the Father and God the Son have the same wrath.

Revelation 6:16-17 (NASB)

16and they said to the mountains and to the rocks, “Fall on us and
hide us from the presence of Him who sits on the throne, and from
the wrath of the Lamb; 17for the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to stand?”

What is different from God and Jesus is not their equality of nature but rather, their function or role.

That there is a difference between the portrayal of God in the Old Testament and the portrayal in the New Testament is clear, hence the question. This led Marcion, in the early second century, to decide that the Supreme God who sent Jesus could not have been the Creator God of the Old Testament. In the Antithesis, he said

Chapter I:

The Creator God is judicial, harsh, and mighty in war.
The Supreme God is gentle and simply good and excellent.

Chapter II:

The Creator God is inconsistent, in respect of persons, sometimes disapproving where approbation is deserved; or else lacking in foresight, bestowing approbation on men who ought rather be reprobated, as if he either censured his own past judgements, or could not forecast his future ones.

Jesus Christ and none else revealed a new God, who, in the Old world and in the Old time and under the Old God was unknown and unheard of...

Marcion might have been wrong in his concept of a Creator God (Old Testament) and a Supreme God (New Testament), but he did clearly see the difference in the two accounts.

If, as modern Christianity certainly teaches, there are not two different Gods, then the difference may be explained as a cultural one. The authors of the Hebrew Bible believed in a harsh and judgemental God, so this is how they most often wrote of him. Jesus, and the gospel authors who gave us his words, believed in a loving, forgiving God, and so this is how the Father is portrayed throughout the New Testament.

Marcion's understanding of two Gods is incompatible with the Nicene doctrine of the Holy Trinity, and the modern contrast is between the Old Testament concept of God and Jesus.